Posted
by
kdawson
on Monday September 04, 2006 @06:10PM
from the who-is-watching-whom? dept.

Bride of Chucky writes "There's a new video codec out there that claims to offer 'up to 40 percent better video quality' but that resets your computer's DNS settings — opening the way for Trojans, rootkits, or whatever. Techworld warns that zCodec looks professional enough, is widely available, and comes in at 100KB. What's the bet the media companies are behind this somewhere?"

I agree with you. There are plenty of trojens out there other than condoms; why would this one be a corporate conspiracy? A quick Google search [google.com] shows that this is nothing new. I think that companies learned their lesson from Sony's rootkit fiasco.

Any software that is installed on my computer without my permission is inherently bad. I paid for my computer, not Sony, not the RIAA. Thus, neither Sony nor the RIAA have the right to install software on my computer. If someone wants me to have DRM software on my computer, they should buy me that computer.

Yes, I read the parent. I still think ALL DRM is bad. I don't make illegal copies, but anything that restricts my right to make LEGAL copies is inherently a bad thing. Since DRM applications cannot know whether I am making a legal copy or an illegal copy, any limit on copying unfairly restricts my legal right to make backup copies. Thus, I do not want DRM software on my computer, whether it be Sony's or someone elses.

While I agree that the submitter is probably full of shit... your argument is kind of weak. Try a little word-replacement and see what you get...

"Follow the money. Sony has plenty to make off hardware and music sales to risk the kind of bad press and fines they'd get by installing a rootkit on your computer"

Sony makes a whole fuckload more money from their products than the MPAA gets from suing grandmothers, and that sure didn't stop them from one of the biggest PR blunders by a tech company in recent memory.

It's far more likely that a script kiddie or spammer type is responsible... but I would NOT put this sort of thing past the shitbags at the MPAA.

After R'ing TFA, I'd say the submittor is almost certainly fulla shit, only because this thing looks like it's chock full of malware elements. That being said, I still wouldn't put it past the MPAA to try to pull something similar.

Sony makes a whole fuckload more money from their products than the MPAA gets from suing grandmothers, and that sure didn't stop them from one of the biggest PR blunders by a tech company in recent memory.

FYI - Sony has been making loss in the recent years - until this year.

No, especially if you _do_ follow the money, that's a dumb analogy. Yes, please do follow the money:- Sony's music division makes money by, you know, selling CDs. The Sony "rootkit" was a piece of copy-protection software which was supposed to help sell more CDs. It wasn't just some piece of wanton malware, and indeed the malware uses were simply because it was designed and programmed by the cheapest incompetent monekys. But at any rate, its purpose was to make more money for Sony.

I'd give a lot more consideration to an enterprising spammer/botnet advertiser being behind this.

Exactly.

We have no evidence for the media corporations being involved in such actions; and it wouldn't make much sense for them to do so, either. This adware will make money; money is something that media companies already have, but adware companies constantly work to get. What the media companies need is not more money, but to scare people off of using p2p software - and this isn't the way to do that. No,

Basically, the submitter is an irrational idiot pandering to the anarchist conspiracy theorists in an attempt to start a flamewar.

Wow, is this an extension of an eye for an eye? Now we're up to 'a kneejerk asstard for a kneejerk asstard'.
The submitter has as much right to make stupid links between some malware and the **AA as you have linking his silly analysis to anarchism.

So I clicked on the zcodec.com link above and the first thing I noticed was the use of some copyrighted movie posters on their page. And then I saw the link for the "therms of use." "Professional enough" indeed...

So I clicked on the zcodec.com link above and the first thing I noticed was the use of some copyrighted movie posters on their page. And then I saw the link for the "therms of use." "Professional enough" indeed...

Yeah, I saw the "therms of use page" linky here: http://www.zcodec.com/therms.html [zcodec.com] -- notice that the web page is therms.html . At least they are consistently wrong:)

I thought it kinda looked OK, but I noticed there was not FAQ, and there was no info on what to do with said codec. Hey, its only

If you do a reverse lookup on www.zcodec.com (85.255.117.106), you'll get "85.255.117.106-xbox.dedi.inhoster.com". That doesn't sound right for a legit download. Not that you'd normally do such lookups...

Whaths wrong withs givingth the Igorth a bit of workth ? They are dependable and efficienth. Ith's not their fault they have trouble finding employmenth in their usual line of exhpertiseth. There are only so many brainth floating around you know (ha ha)...

Does that mean I have to pay PG&E (Pacific Gas and Electricity) to use it... oh wait. I do already!

But on a more serious note, since the operation of the "codec" is misrepresented, I wonder how enforcable the terms are? Especially the "no reverse engineering" restriction (which is invalid in some states anyway).

Well it will install under wine, I just did it. But the only thing I can find in my.wine c_drive folder is a dir called HQ codec and the files register.exe, Uninstall.exe. Register.exe crashes wine, and Uninstall.exe removes the HQ codec directory and the start menu links. I don't have a real install of windows and so far thats all I can find on my system. I'll dig around but it didn't appear to send any data out when I ran either exe. Maybe register.exe is it and it crashed before it could do anything. I

Unfortunately, it probably wasn't. Survey any of the RIAA/MPAA posts here and you'll quickly find a widespread and virulent tin foil brigade who think those organisations are out to get them, in any and every way possible.

If it installs/allows malware, then you're right; "the media companies" probably aren't behind it. However - I've been wondering for a while how long it would be before "the media companies" got around to releasing a codec that "phones home" and lets them know what video file you're playing and from where you're playing it so that they can flush out "piracy". Codec's are native code that we blindly download and let run, after all... it seems like it would be trivial to insert a bit of code that sends a qu

After the sony rootkit thing, who was charged with unauthorized tampering with computers? Which individuals were punished?Just because I let you into my house to install a CD player doesn't mean you should unlatch the backdoor, open windows, even if you give me a stupid piece of paper to sign with lots of fine print saying that you can do that sort of stuff.

Maybe that's legal in the USA, but I think it's not in other countries, and AFAIK the Sony rootkit has affected other countries, so why hasn't anyone be

A tin-foil hat is a mark of someone who can, in all seriousness, say 'if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it must be a concealed listening device placed by the government under the instruction of the military-industrial complex and funded by the media industry.' The poster should wear his with pride.

...user stupidity makes a dandy explanation. If there is a universal truth in today's networked world, it is that the gullibility of the average Netizen knows no bounds. I'd be willing to bet that you could write a program that claims to turn your printer into a replicator, and some doofus would buy it.

This ranks right up there with the scores of malware programs that pretend to be malware removers. I assume the original poster would have us believe that all those are really written by the likes of Symantec and McAfee?

This ranks right up there with the scores of malware programs that pretend to be malware removers. I assume the original poster would have us believe that all those are really written by the likes of Symantec and McAfee?

What, like Norton Antivirus? It's often installed without you asking for it, it consumes vast amounts of resources, it embeds itself into your operating system's interface, it hides itself from other programs, it phones home regularly, and it's extremely difficult to remove.

However, you can't really claim malice on behalf of Symantec et al. (Well, maybe you can, but that seems to have more in common with gratuitous Microsoft-bashing - logic along the lines of "We think $COMPANY_NAME software is badly written, badly written software is evil, therefore $COMPANY_NAME is evil.") Yeah, their software sucks, but there's no evidence that a team of engineers at Symantec sat down and said "How can we make our software crash machines, corrupt data and turn computers into zombie systems?

Don't underestimate how disconnected from reality or logic conspiracy theorists can be. There _are_ people who believe that PC viruses are written by antivirus companies, human/animal diseases are created in the lab by big pharma corporations, fires are started by the firemen, etc. It's the "follow the money" kind of conspiracy theory. And don't get me wrong, "follow the money" is generally good advice, but some people are too stupid or too schizophrenic to actually successfully follw the money... or any co

The voices said that you were wrong and they wouldn't talk to you. There is no way you could ever figure out the secrets on your own so you're just plain screwed unless the voices change their minds, but that wouldn't happen because they only talk to me!

Linus had enough trouble debugging the kernel to get the last lot of malware working, and these virus writers aren't exactly playing fair and giving him the interface specs, or any cash to do the porting work. Sheesh! Virus writers must think those kernel guys are made of money or something.

That's incredibly presumptuous and a completely baseless accusation. There are lots of people who can clearly benefit from trojans, and someone obviously has seen the potential in video codecs as a nice "social engineering" way of fooling the gullible masses into downloading them. The average person generally searches for video codecs once in a blue moon - they have no way of knowing which sites are legitimate, or which files are legitimate. They'll download whatever sounds promising. In fact, the website looks far more legitimate than some of the genuine codec sites out there.

Smarter users might do regular intensive searching to make sure they are getting a legitimate file, but the average user will not. It's far more likely that the author of this trojan is just exploiting the fact that so many users of codecs are clueless than yet another paranoid conspiracy that the media companies are behind it. Really, will the slashdot editors ever get over their bias and just print actual NEWS.

Enough is a enough. A message needs to be sent to these bastards. Suing and fines only do so much. They fine these bastards, they file for bankruptcy and its over. They close the company and the fines and suits go away. Can't sue what doesn't exist and current corp. laws protect us from going after personal assets.

Time to bring some real charges against these fuckers and send a few of them to prison for a good long stretch. And I'm not talking 6 months in a jail with 500 hours of community service. I'm talking 10 years in maximum security.

I know some people say the punishment doesn't fit the crime but I think its time it did. If we would have locked up some of them bastards from Sony then I bet this one wouldn't' happen.

Okay first of all, it was registered almost a full year ago and second, even now I could probably drive to his house/office (assuming that info is accurate) and arrest him myself faster than the FBI could. Why does everyone always sit around and do nothing when stuff like this happens? Someone should at least give him a call:-) It's not even nigeria this time, how expensive could it be?

...because even if it were true, we'd likely never see proof. As such, that kind of speculation in a story submission is immature on the part of the submitter and allowing it to go out unedited is irresponsible of the editor. (Bonus points if they're the same person, I didn't check.)

Looks like this is coming from a known source of spyware in Ukraine, "Inhoster.com".

"zcodec.com" is actually "85.255.117.106-xbox.dedi.inhoster.com", a dedicated server at a "nlayer.net" colocation site in San Francisco. The dedicated server appears to be associated with "atrivo".

Both "inhoster.com" and "atrivo" appear to be "psuedo-ISPs"; they have web sites that look like those of an ISP, but they don't really offer services for sale. Both have bad reputations: see "Spywarequake Scam on the Run [netrn.net]. The previous attacks were based on phony anti-spyware programs. Now that people are wise to that one, the new frontier is apparently phony codecs.

The WHOIS information for "zcodec.net" appears to be bogus. It's given as "Abrahamen Biderman" at "5624 17th Ave, Brooklyn, New York" There is an "Abraham Biderman" with an office at 5624 17th Ave, Brooklyn, New York, and he's a political figure and investment banker [forbes.com], with a career running major financial institutions. Probably not behind some two-bit spyware scam.

Perhaps someone should notify him. Sounds like he might have enough $$ clout to be heard when finds out how his identy has been 'stolen' (used w/o his permision) to perpetrate this sort of internet scam.

wow a codec is spyware - inconcievable!!! Who the heck told you to download an unheard of codec which you probably didn't need. The vast majority of spyware is around because people download things they don't actually need from an untrusted third party source. I can't begin to count the number of computers I've had to fix because some twit downloaded a codec pack or opened an scr file in their email or downloaded some game crack to pirate a game and found it installed bonzi buddy.

Virtually every bloody codec pack you could download contained spyware/adware - some of them put in by the developers themselves. I've got some lovely versions of Nimo, K-lite and gordian knot to prove it. Hell, DivX pre 5.2 had GAIN in it and if you didn't know where to look on their website you had no way of finding the version without it (it didnt have the encoder so wasn't gain supported) . VLC is all I download for video playback now. If they don't support it I don't need to watch it - I've an flv file convertor for those of you who know how to download the dang yourtube/google videos that vlc cant handle perfectly.

Learnt the hard way not to download things from any third party site even if its trusted back in high school. I run XP because I like playing games. If I had a tinfoil hat I'd read the source and then compile and do MD5 checks but I'm lazy and will take the binary packages, and I suspect one day I will pay for that laziness, despite my use of Tea Timer and the Spybot S&D hosts file and immunization databse, Lavasofts ad aware, windows defender and rootkit revealer, hijack this, peer guardian 2, and spyware blaster. One day I will be an idiot and download a binary with some spyware that is still under the radar for all of these and I will be pissed when I realize it. Atleast, I will realize it, but most users wont.

Usually that would be Windows Media Player. I wonder if they can create a video file that forces WMP to get this codec? Then it's just a case of releasing george_bush_naked.avi (ewww) on bittorrent and let the trojan horses run/roll.

Music companies have huge legal departments that can (and do) get their info from ISPs with subpoenas. Trojan distributors are constantly trying to find new ways to push their junk onto your computer, often by paying heavily for 0day exploits.

This isn't news - "codecs" have been used for years as spyware/trojan droppers. Great social engineering - "hey, to view this porn, you need to install this codec". It's sufficiently tech sounding, and computery to sound believable, so it works.

What the hell does that mean? How do you know if something looks "professional"? Are you checking to see if it's a full-time business vs a hobby, or some kind of test like that?

Sometimes I think "professional" is one of the dumbest and most-abused (to the point of being renderred meaningless) words in our language. We're seeing used here as implying lack of spyware (wtf does that have to do with getting paid?!) and it has often been used to describe how someone dresses. What a great word for saying not

Actually, there is [google.com]. One of the oddities about New York City is that a mailing address of New York, NY means Manhattan. To properly address something in Brooklyn (and thus for Google Maps to find it) you need to use Brooklyn, NY.

Funny, I see about 650 [google.com]. And even less if you specify that the URL must contain "Therms" [google.com]. If fact, with that second one, there are only 5 pages returned, three in French, one from a.de domain, and our very own zcodec.

There is a legitimate DNS server sitting at 4.2.2.2. I think it belongs to GTE (now Verizon). It has the misfortune of having an easy IP address to remember. In a pinch, if you can't remember the IP of your own DNS, there's always 4.2.2.2. Most people who use it have it as their alternate DNS. Verizon likes to give it names like i-will-not-steal-service.sys.gtei.net.

You've already gotten a reply to your original post that indicates at least one other person has seen this happen to their DNS settings. If I'd never typed in 4.2.2.2 myself, and I had no previous business relationship with Verizon or GTE, I'd call shenanigans. A malware writer needing to disable automatic DNS for some reason would have to specify a replacement IP and 4.2.2.2 is convenient to hard code.

Or use Windows and don't download dangerous software. Any piece of software with a set of "therms of use" should be avoided (see the software's home page to know what I'm talking about). Or of course buy a Mac (sorry, Apple fanboy here:-P)

Or the claim of a 40% increase in quality (WTF does that even mean? I'm 80% more awesome than these guys) with lower bitrate without any of the fanfare you'd usually expect from such an amazing advance.